Agenda item - Community Infrastructure Levy - Draft Charging Schedule and Draft Regulation 123 List

Report of the Executive Director, Economy, Environment & Culture

Resolved:

1)         That the Committee notes the results of the Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule CIL Consultation 2017 Report (Appendix 4) and subsequent recommendations arising from the CIL Viability Assessment Addendum (February 2018) (Appendix 3).

2)         That the Committee agrees to publish the Draft Charging Schedule (Appendix 1) in accordance with regulation 16 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended), for six weeks formal consultation, and to authorise the Head of Planning to make any necessary minor editorial/grammatical amendments to the Draft Charging Schedule prior to consultation.

3)         That the Committee agrees to submit this published Draft Charging Schedule for examination in accordance with regulation 19 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) unless substantive modifications are required whereupon a Statement of Modifications would be produced and brought to this committee prior to publication.

4)         That the Committee agrees to publish the draft Regulation 123 List, which sets out a framework of infrastructure which may be funded from the levy (Appendix 2), for a period of six weeks formal consultation and to authorise the Head of Planning to make any necessary minor editorial/grammatical amendments to this list prior to consultation.

57.1    Officers introduced the report. Responses to the consultation which stated that the proposed charges were either too high or manageable had been received in equal numbers. Two changes had been made to the proposed Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) scheme following consultation; a reduced rate for purpose built student accommodation and a nil rate for strategic sites.

57.2    The Chair noted that the Conservative Group had submitted an amendment to the recommendations and asked Councillor Nemeth to move the amendment.

57.3    Councillor Nemeth stated that he had proposed the amendment as he felt that designating King Alfred as a strategic site and charging a nil rate CIL was not justified by abnormal costs however after discussion with Officers he had decided to withdraw the amendment. Councillor Nemeth stated that while he was not fully convinced of the abnormal costs associated with King Alfred he was satisfied that the Developer would still be required to make a Section 106 contribution.

57.4    Councillor Druitt asked what the value of the lost CIL was for the strategic sites if they were charged a nil rate and if Officers had given any consideration to redrawing the boundaries of the charging zones so that the site fell into a lower rate area.

57.5    Officers responded that the nil rate had been included in the charging schedule because of the significant abnormal costs associated with some sites and to recognise the significant positive externalities generated by development on these sites. All the strategic sites identified were in zone 1 which had the highest rates and where there was a lot of significant development so redrawing the zone 1 boundary without excluding other development would not have been possible. Officers stated that charging the lowest rate on the schedule would still impact the King Alfred development to the point that it would not be viable.

57.6    In response to Councillor Mac Cafferty, Officers stated that water fountains would be covered by the 123 list and that an annual report would be published detailing how CIL income had been spent.

57.7    Councillor Mac Cafferty asked if Officers had considered CIL with an open book approach to viability assessments.

57.8    Officers stated that the viability assessment undertaken was in line with best practice.

57.9    Councillor Theobald stated that she was surprised at the low response rate to the consultation and asked how Local Authorities which had adopted CIL had found the process.

57.10  Officers responded that other authorities had provided positive feedback on CIL as its expenditure was less restricted than Section 106 and CIL could be levied across a greater range of developments.

57.11  Councillor Peltzer Dunn stated that Dixon Searle Partnership had recommended charging at £250/m² for purpose built student accommodation in the viability assessment they had provided for the council. Councillor Peltzer Dunn asked why the proposed rate had been reduced.

57.12  Officers stated that Dixon Searle Partnership’s viability assessment had recommended a range for the CIL rate for purpose built student accommodation. The preliminary charging schedule was at the top of this range. Following responses from Brighton University and Select Property (a student accommodation provider) further viability work was carried out. This further work found that that the rate should be reduced to the lower end of the range.

57.13  Officers also clarified that additional appendixes had not been included in the agenda due to their size but had been published online at the same time as the agenda.

57.14  Resolved:

1)         That the Committee notes the results of the Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule CIL Consultation 2017 Report (Appendix 4) and subsequent recommendations arising from the CIL Viability Assessment Addendum (February 2018) (Appendix 3).

2)         That the Committee agrees to publish the Draft Charging Schedule (Appendix 1) in accordance with regulation 16 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended), for six weeks formal consultation, and to authorise the Head of Planning to make any necessary minor editorial/grammatical amendments to the Draft Charging Schedule prior to consultation.

3)         That the Committee agrees to submit this published Draft Charging Schedule for examination in accordance with regulation 19 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) unless substantive modifications are required whereupon a Statement of Modifications would be produced and brought to this committee prior to publication.

4)         That the Committee agrees to publish the draft Regulation 123 List, which sets out a framework of infrastructure which may be funded from the levy (Appendix 2), for a period of six weeks formal consultation and to authorise the Head of Planning to make any necessary minor editorial/grammatical amendments to this list prior to consultation.